Questions abound in the Bibliotheca Alexandrina on the second day of a conference on Darwin's legacy. Where can I get a coffee? Is this seat taken? Is religion compatible with evolutionary theory? Delegates search for answers.

They showed to what extent evolution was accepted among students and teachers in Muslim-majority countries. Not much. But then the US was no better, observed Rosenau. It languished in the bottom five of industrialised countries accepting evolution. The others were Turkey, Cyprus, Latvia and Lithuania. Wiles said he and colleagues at the Evolution Education Research Centre (EERC) were studying attitudes towards evolution in countries such as Egypt, Lebanon, Indonesia and Pakistan. In Indonesia there was open resistance, said Wiles. The leader of one student body objected to EERC's very presence on campus. "Don't give the survey here! How can you believe we are from apes?" he cried. The students rallied behind him. Most of the Indonesian teachers surveyed used the works of Harun Yahya in science classes. In Egypt and Lebanon, said Boujaoude, Muslim and Christian students were influenced by their religious beliefs. Around half of the Egyptian teachers surveyed opposed evolution and all Egyptian biology teachers opposed evolution. Claims that science and Islam are compatible look shaky against such findings. Boujaoude pointed out that objections were based on limited understanding on the nature of evidence and the nature of science. The narrowness was hardly surprising given the lack of investment and activity in the scientific field, said Hameed, using Nature data as proof. The scarcity of knowledge and resources was one of the reasons that Saudi Arabia needed outside help to deal with swine flu, he surmised.

But untangling the issue went deeper than what happened in the classroom, it was also about what teachers and governments accepted and understood about science. "Muslims have been using fragments of science and fragments of religion to make them more compatible," said Hameed as he pulled out quotes from a pair of Peshawari muftis, one who attacked the Met Office for providing moon sighting data and another who praised Islam's scientific legacy.

There was some good news. There was no clear doctrinal opposition to evolution and Muslims were looking to appropriate theologically palatable aspects of it. The bad news was the absence of debate between scholars and scientists. Anti-western feelings and the blurring of lines between evolution and secularism would make that harder. "If it's presented as a dichotomy, it's going to be religion. It depends on who is going to shape the narrative."

Nidhal Guessoum intervened to say that Islamic creationism was a "fuzzy mosaic of ideas" and not the same as US creationism, which was peddled by Harun Yahya. Islamic creationism used scripture, he said, it was all about Adam, Adam and clay. There were more references to hadith and the Qur'an, which is what set it apart from the Christian-influenced movement.

The vacuum meant someone more mainstream could finish off Yahya's work, someone who appeared more credible, to use the internet and solidify the message of Islamic creationism.

To people wondering why creationism was getting any kind of platform, Anglican priest Michael Roberts offers a reminder. Creationism is totally untrue. It exposes people of the book – many of whom, among them distinguished speakers at this conference, see no contradiction between evolutionary theory and their faith – to ridicule. And if it gains traction with governments or other authorities, then the public practice of science and research will be hindered.